What's The Point Of Finishing Moves?

[Y 2 Jake]

There are literally three moves on TNA that nobody kicks out of, Black Hole Slam & Muscle Buster. I know that's two, but I'm leaving one for when Jeff Jarrett starts to wrestle again. Even so, I do believe somebody kicked out of the Muscle Buster a couple of weeks ago.

But if the moves often don't finish wrestlers off, then what's the point? I know they do sometimes. But very often they'll hit the move once, and they'll kick out. It's more likely that somebody will get pinned after a shot to the head by one of those inexplicably hard title belts.

It's ok to have somebody kick out of a finisher on a big show. I don't mean a monthly PPV, I'm on about a show that means something. In TNA those are few and far between. I'm on about only at Bound For Glory and possibly Slammiversary. Maybe the odd match in between. not weekly on iMPACT and twice on PPV. It's pointless.

 

[Tim]

Well, you've got it exactly right, Jake. It's called a finishing move because its supposed to finish the match. If people kick out of a finishing move on a regular basis, there is no real point to it. If you want to have a secondary finishing move that people kick ut of most of the time, than use that one instead instead of your main one for people to kick out of. They can sometimes kick out of a finishing move, and if somebody kicked out of the muscle buster for example, people would be shocked. But if somebody kicked out of somebody else's finishing move, the crowd is like, "No big deal, its happened a lot of times before." Basically, don't use finishing moves that don't finish your opponents off, because then they're not finishing moves.

 

[Uncle Sam]

I actually couldn't tell you a lot of people's finishers in TNA. If I didn't used to see Chris Sabin use the Cradle Shock, I wouldn't know that was his finisher now. Same goes for the Styles Clash and Angel's Wings, although it's no surprise the latter hasn't been used lately. I know Curry Man uses the Spice Rack but I honestly don't know what that is, just it's name.

Petey Williams finisher I only remember because it's incredibly visually impressive. Otherwise, no, TNA matches don't get centered around finishers really at all. Oh, actually, LAX do a good job of keeping their finisher's profiles up.

 

[klunderbunker]

You're absolutely right. This is the reason I can't get into big Japanese matches. So often it takes the same finishers 3-4 times to knock someone out for 3 seconds. If its a FINISHER shouldn't it FINISH the match? They're trying to push the Hellevator as the next big move, but that's all I can think of. Joe's Muscle Buster at least looks good (I'm guessing the Clutch is gone btw), the Black Hole Slam can be awesome looking if the guy is small enough, but other than that, most TNA finishers are just bad. Everyone kicks out of them all the time, even the Angle Slam. Its turning into Japanese wrestling in that aspect, and to me thats not good.

 

[Starchild]

No one really kicks out of the Canadian Destroyer either.
I did notice this about TNA before, but you have to realize what we're looking at here. TNA is gimmick central and they try to separate themselves from WWE as much as possible. Generally speaking, in WWE we only see someone kick out of a finisher on ppv's and then that is only when they are trying to push someone as legit or in the main event (ala Jeff Hardy kicking out of Pedigree at No Way Out).
TNA wants to make all their guys look legit, so they make it seem like even after taking a finisher they can still get up and get back in the match. I agree though that it does make finishers look weak. If you're gonna have them do that, then at least give the person a new finisher that the opponent never or rarely ever kicks out of.

 

[-John-]

I dont see much point in it.

Like you said Jake, There seems no point in it. Abyss' Black hole slam only works because he is a monstrous heel who seems to be able to concure all. The rest of the moves just make the wrestlers themselves look stupid and like there moves aren't as good as Abyss'. The way TNA Wrestlers go down when a Black Hole Slam is issued is amazingly different to say a Muscle Buster delivered by Samoa Joe.

 

[PWAQfan]

Someone mentioned japanese matches...TNA is nothing like them.
Japanese matches are more fighting spirit and to kick out of a finisher is actually rather unlikely it's more the time signature moves are kicked out of and fought back from and then a big move is used to knock it all down.

though i do think TNA has this problem, i can't for the life of me have thought that moves that Lethal and Dutt do for no reason are their finishers etc

 

[Dragonslayer]

Well, I believe it was in the Attitude Era that the whole "kicking out of finishers"-thing really picked up... I mean, maybe I'm not remembering all of it, but when I grew up in the late 80ies/early 90ies, when a guy hit his Finisher, that was that. When the Sharpshooter was on, it was over. When the Leg was dropped, it was over. When the Top Rope Elbow came and hit, it was over. I simply don't remember many matches that still went on after a finisher was hit - but correct me if my memory tricks me here.

However, I do recall that in days of the Attitude era and Monday Night Wars, those things became a lot more frequent. Austin kicking out of the Rock Bottom, Rock kicking out of pretty much everything and so on and so forth... But then again, I never minded that. I felt it added a lot of drama. However, for that to work, you first need to establish those specific moves as being REALLY that devastating. I think this is what you're pointing out here that TNA is missing - before they have even established all their finishers as THAT devastating, they already have people kicking out left and right. Agreed, that might be a bit off the point.

However, I personally find it actually more logical for people to kick out even after a finisher. I believe that a "finisher" is supposed to be more of a trademark maneuver a guy usually/always does before ending the match - but is able to only do that move or score a pin off it after the opponent is already sufficiently worn down, or when he realizes that he can now pin the guy if he hits another big move - and then preferrably he will choose the "big move" he is a specialist of, which of course would be his Finisher. Of course, every once in awhile a guy might hit a quick finisher out of nowhere and score a surprise win... but a finisher per se should also not be considered THAT devastating to be an end to everything. I mean, in that case, every wrestler would logically only be trying to pull off their finisher right away, if that ended the match in any case. There would ne no point in doing any other moves whatsoever for 20-something minutes if one Slam/Submission would end it after five seconds.

So while it is definitely true that Finishers need to be established as Finishers - in that they are KNOWN to be one guy's Finishing Move and used sufficiently frequently to actually win a match (without seemingly EVERYBODY being able to kick out after it nevertheless), but they should also be kickout-able; just as to illustrate that the opponent still has some "fighting spirit" left in him, or that he hasn't been worn down sufficiently yet. I believe it is the balancing between making a finisher all-destroying and "just another move" needs to be gotten right. And I agree - maybe TNA needs to cut down on those kickouts (especially on the regular shows); however I think they are maybe trying to create more of a "realistic" feel to their matches by doing that - displaying basically every move as "just another move", even if finishers are "trademarks" of certain superstars, thinking maybe along the lines of: "Why would ONE single move end a match that ten or twenty others before it couldn't?"

I suppose that might be the reasoning behing this... but well, it might be a good point to cut down on that a little indeed, just so as to make Finishers more "respected" again. Because only then can a finisher truly elicit the huge response it should.

 

[Talon_DR]

I completely agree that the concept of Trademark Move kickouts have been overdone. Rather than rely on finishers to finish matches, TNA relies on interference, which is a horrible idea. Is it overdone, yes. Should it be fixed, yes

I actually couldn't tell you a lot of people's finishers in TNA. If I didn't used to see Chris Sabin use the Cradle Shock, I wouldn't know that was his finisher now. Same goes for the Styles Clash and Angel's Wings, although it's no surprise the latter hasn't been used lately. I know Curry Man uses the Spice Rack but I honestly don't know what that is, just it's name.

Petey Williams finisher I only remember because it's incredibly visually impressive. Otherwise, no, TNA matches don't get centered around finishers really at all. Oh, actually, LAX do a good job of keeping their finisher's profiles up.

Many of the wrestlers use their finishers, with the exception of Velvet Sky, Rhaka Khan and maybe Raisha Saeed, I know many of their finishers.

The ones that I can think of that are dominant are Black Hole Slam, Awesome Bomb, Canadian Destroyer, The Hellevator, Super Eric Driver/Wheelbarrow Neckbreaker, Gringo Killa, Border Toss, Last Call, Lethal Combo, Diving Elbow Drop, The Move that Rocks the World, The Gore, The Payoff and many others

I think that it is pretty much only the main event that kicks out of finishers often like with the Olympic Slam, Styles Clash and Musclebuster. TNA needs to fix that.

 

[Mr. TM]

I think the reason for this is TNA's uncreative writings. It would seem impressive to kick out of a finisher. So lets do it! Then they use the idea again, and again. Its the same as TNA using gimmick matches over and over. Its just not creative. For a while, WWE Stars seemed to kick out a lot of times. This usually led to the audience being on the edge of their seats. But then they stopped, and a finisher ment the 3 count. The only time recently that this happens is at Wrestlemania now adays. That is why WWE is in another example far superior to TNA.

 

[ryancoke]

If you're going to kick out of a finisher, why not just reverse the damn thing? People give a better give a much bigger reaction to someone reversing than they do to someone kicking out all the time, especially depending on the match time. If in a main event someone hits their finisher about 3 minutes in, opponent kicks out, move loses cred. But, IMO, a reversal, especially done by a face, hypes the crowd, builds match momentum, one person gets a push, and fans don't see the supposed "weakness" of a move as plainly as a kickout.

 

[Rusty]

Yes, I agree. This is one of the main problems of TNA matches in general. The matches can end in almost any different way from a kick to the head, to a low blow, or by a shot by the 'hard' title belt. I hardly remember any finishers because they either: hardly ever use them, or they are booked so weak that it never sticks in my mind due to the fact that many opposition wrestlers kick out of the move on a fairly regular basis. I've been watching TNA for 6 months and I didn't even know what was A.J Styles' finisher move until a few weeks ago. Considering he is one of TNA's biggest superstars, thats pretty bad.

Finishing moves are important in providing a good and memorable match. As Jake said, kicking out of finishing moves should only be used for the big pay per views, not for the weekly iMPACT. Having a finishing move that almost always finishes the match, is vital to building up a wrestler into a 'big deal'. You look at the WWE for example, once a finisher is hit, 9 times out of 10 it means the match is over. Thats exactly how a match should be booked. It not only ends the match in a fitting way, but it also helps the superstar in general as once they hit their finisher, they have won the match.

 

[Dmonson]

I agree TNA has made most of the finishing moves seem as just signature moves. But, is this really a thread on finishers in general? or just Finishers in TNA because correct me if I am wrong but it seems WWE does a good job with finishers being finishers.

 

[wwenba]

I actually thought this thread would be interesting till I saw it was just a TNA complaint thread.

Please, gimme a break with all the TNA complaining. So what if it doesnt always finish off the opponent. To me it only speaks to the opponents ability. If I see someone kick out of the Muscle Buster im gonna think their a badass not "wow that finishing move is weak". When people kick out of finishing moves its usually cause their good.


Why do you guys want everything to be predictable. One person said "This is one of the main problems of TNA matches in general. The matches can end in almost any different way from a kick to the head, to a low blow, or by a shot by the 'hard' title belt"

The matches can end in almost any different way? -Isnt that a good thing? Is it better that in WWE i can tell exactly when a match is going to finish and how its going to finish?

If people are saying in TNA they dont know how the finish to the match is gonna go down then thats a GREAT thing.
Basically what this thread is telling me is that TNA is unpredictable and WWE is predictable.

 

[2012isbs]

I think that it's just a signature move if it's gets kicked out of left and right the only exception is some submission holds ex. Crippler Crossface, Sharpshooter, and Walls of Jericho but even then people tap out sometimes. TNA has only a handful of finishers that are done a lot Blackhole slam, Angle slam, Hellevator, Border Toss, Scissors kick, Gore, Gringo Killah, Chummer, Spice rack and Canadian destroyer and all of those have been kicked out of. As compared to wwe where almost every superstar has a finisher.

 

[Nwoite]

Not only are TNA finishers often kicked out of, but as somebody said before, a lot of people's finishers are used less and less. the Styles Clash was mentioned, but back when he was Christopher Daniles, the Angel's Wings wasn't used that much, and i really can't remember the last time Dutt used his finisher or even what it is.

As to the guy who said its good that TNA has all of these alternate endings to a match: NO, NO IT'S NOT. When Eddie Guerrero used to win all of his matches(yes, pretty much every single match) i hated it, because i felt like it disrespected his ability as a wrestler. the same is true here: If most matches are won via DQ, interference, low blows, or belt/weapon shots, that's not a good thing, that means that the wrestler isn't good enough to win the match on his own.

As for the same happening in WWE, i can only remember a few times, but when it happened it made it memorable: Flair kicking out of two Pedigrees vs H in the Hell in a Cell, Austin needing two stunners vs Scott Hall, there were a few times H needed three pedigrees vs Michaels, same with Rock needing to use more than one Rock Bottom, or Taker needing three Tombstones vs Kane. all of those stick in my head, maybe not always the exact ppv or the opponent, but the moment that i will always remember.

 

[Kris]

If a finishing move is kicked out of every so often at big PPVs (Wrestlemania, SummerSlam, Bound For Glory etc...) then I think it builds up the guy kicking out and keeps the finisher looking strong. However if someone kicks out every single week to a finisher then it seems kinda pointless for it to be a finishing move, like someone said that makes it more of a signature move. I don't go out of my way to watch TNA, so I don't know about the under use of finishers thing. However if that's the case then they need to stop it. Finishing moves should be used if not every match then at least most matches. If you want to make a particular match seem special have a kick out from the finisher, or use an old finisher. I think it was an Austin/Rock match at a WrestleMania where I can remember Austin using the the Million Dollar Dream, and that did make it look like the Rock was unbeatable to have Austin digging that deep to beat him. Doing something like that where you know you'll almost never see it again does make it special. The same goes for what Nwoite said about requiring three Tombstones to finish Kane etc... That makes a match stick in your mind as epic.

One thing I can't get at all is the Hardys. As far as I know Matt uses just the ToF to finish a match, whereas Jeff hits it and then goes for the Swanton. Doesn't that make things a little inconsistent?

 

[shalliin]

I agree with some of what has been said in here, but not all. Just because it seems like people are often kicking out of finishers, that doesn't mean that it is. The actual issue as someone kind of hinted at is that in TNA right now, the big names don't have just 1 finisher. They have several 'signature' moves that they use to try and finish the match, and 1 'final' move they go for when they need to put an end to a match because their other moves didn't work.

While it is true that there are a lot of matches that don't finish with the common finishing move, when they do hit the 'final' move, it does end the match somewhere in the 80-90 percent of the time. Most of the time that they are not successful is actually due more to outside interference then kicking out of someone's finishing move.

And beside while the moves are 'finishing' moves, and are supposed to end a match,it doesn't mean that they should be overly effective. That's the issue I've always had with the WWE. With the really big names, they often over emphasize the 'finishing' moves. Stone Cold-Rock-HHH-HbK. Their finishing moves are not really that impressive. A jawbreaker, a sidewalk slam, a face buster and a superkick. These are the four that for a few years their moves were unbeatable. Even Taker's tombstone was kicked out of when everyone was beat by Austin's pathetic jawbreaker. And you can count on 1 hand the number of times someone kicked out of HHH's pedigree.

A finisher, no matter what it is, needs to be used smartly and at the right time in order for it to be effective. And having someone kick out on occasion should enhance the match, not detract from the match. It's the same with submission moves and reverse/escape of them. Some wrestlers, like Angle, Samoa Joe and Jericho are considered submission specialists and their finishers reflect that. Yes Angle has the Slam, but his real finisher is the Angle Lock, and Joe's in the Kohime Clutch, not the muscle buster, but since both TNA and WWE have moved away from the submission style of wrestling, especially since the unfortunate incident with Benoit.

Back on topic,

Should finisher's finish a match? Yes,
Should people kick out everytime? No.
Do people kick out everytime, or even most of the time? No.
Do they do so too often? Yes, but it's not as blatant as a lot of people are complaining about.

A quick recap for recent memory.
Samoa joe-- Muscle buster, Kohime clutch.
Angle--Ankle Lock, Olympic/Angle Slam, Release German suplex
Sabin--CradleShock
Senshi--Way of the Warrior (top rope jump into double foot stomp)
Abyss--Blackhole Slam, Electric Shock backbreaker, ChokeSlam
Matt Morgan--Running boot, Hellavator.
Roode--Payoff(fisherman suplex pin, Mr Perfect's was perfect plex)
Dudley's--3d
Curryman--Spice Rack(a torture rack setup into a reverse death valley driver)
Storm--Last Call(his is a superkick ala HBK Sweet Chin Music, but a fallaway slam also used and called the same by JBL of WWE, storm's reference to last call at a bar, JBL reference is for stock market)
Lethal--Big Elbow(ala Macho Man and HBK), Lethal combo(think it's a backbreak flowing into a move like the complete shot face buster)
there are others but I think most of us reading this can name most of the rest.

 

[GNR8701]

It has got to do with TNA not being committed to finishing matches with a finisher. It is not the moves themselves or the creative writers, I think it is the company in general. On the other hand, WWE is very committed to finishers. For example - The Miz. The Miz uses a leg lift followed by a neckbreaker and he calls it the reality check. Apparantly this move is devastating seeing as how he hits it and he wins. Also, you have Shelton Benjamin's Paydirt. I really like how paydirt looks, but it is in reality a front face buster. That move kills. Mark Henry can hit the Worlds Strongest Slam and beat any man in the WWE with it. Khali can chop you in the head and it is a done deal. JBL can clothesline you and pick up a 3 count. These moves are promoted and it really elevates the wrestlers because "You never know when a Clothesline from Hell is comming at you" and it makes the wrestler dangerous. The fact that within an instant Edge can catch Rey Mysterio with a Spear and Rey is down for the count brings an element of excitement and drama to the match and it glues you to the screen because at any moment here it comes. It doesnt hurt the loser of the match because --- He was supposed to lose, the other guy hit his finisher ---. If TNA was more committed to the finishers of matches it would definately make the wrestlers seem more dangerous and much more intense.

 

[The Man of 1,000 Names]

my main issue with finishers is when they come out of nowhere very early on in a match and the guy who uses it wins. i think finishers should do just that, "finish" an opponent who is already beaten up. if an FU comes at the 15 minute mark of a hard fought match, then it makes sense that it knocks the opponent out for three seconds. if it comes at 35 seconds into the match with hardly any prior offense, then the opponent ends up looking really weak.

 

[Show188]

in terms of finishers I remember the great debate to which was a better move
the diamond cutter or the stunner. sure Austin was over but what made the stunner was the person selling it... now a diamond cutter it was just as random as the stunner but it looked way more deadly.. just needed to make that point..

Now in terms of TNA, i read this thread 2 or 3 days before impact aired last week. and the they are trying to build matt morgan but kurt angle kicked out of both of his finishers (bicycle kick, hellavator) and hit a weak angle slam for the win on free TV.. so I agree they do devalue some finishers at times.

 

[AhSpicyDrop]

Actually, the whole kicking out of finishers has been around for ages... It happened all the time during the Ultimate Warrior and Hogan days... Undertaker, Kane.. I'm sure there were other ones.

I remember in the Savage/Warrior "Retirement Match"... Savage hit Warrior with I believe three flying elbow drops that had destroyed competition for years, and Warrior kicked out with ease after the third and then won the match a few mins later.

So it's not really a new thing, but TNA and ROH are both becoming really bad about it. Ring of Honor especially... There's no reason Nigel McGuinness needs to hit four of those Jawbreaker Lariats to put a guy like Tyler Black down... there's just no excuse for it.... and then a month later he may face a guy like Bryan Danielson and beat him with 1-2..

And Japanese wrestling isn't really the same way... Someone else made a point of how there's a lot of big power moves that lead up to the finish. That's how I always remember it... I think back to Hayabusa vs. Jushin Lyger and Lyger hit him with a ton of different strong moves before landing the Fisherman's Buster and winning.

 

[nothingtoregret]

whats the point of having moves which always ends the match. i think its cos they're called finishing moves that people assume they will end the match, but if they were called power moves or something else like that there would be such a problem about people kicking out.
in my opinion it makes the ending better when it ends suddenly/unpredictably. cos why watch a match were u know as soon as one hits his/her finisher its over, it makes wrestling seem more ridiculous, in a boxing match they dont end the fight with a signature punch, they take the victory however they can, so by having it always end with the finisher would be unrealistic, which is what wrestling companies try not to be as much as they can,

and p.s in reply to the person who said about angle kicking out of the hellavator, he didn't, don west called the move wrong, it was a "swing bottom" as its called on svr 2009

 

[CJ The Pirate]

I see a kick out of a finisher as a great element in a big match. It's as iconic as the whole Hogan Slams Andre hoo hah in my eyes.

I can only go so far back as Wrestlemania 15 for the first time I saw it and it have any meaning in a match and that was Undertaker Vs Kane.
It was the first time they'd met. Kane was on a role, looked unbeatable. He'd had problems with Vader but had managed to get by him without any hassle really. But now Undertaker had returned since his destruction by Kane at the Royal Rumble. He now vowed to defeat Kane after initially refusing to fight his baby brother. Everyone was talking about this match. Everyone couldn't wait to see it happen. And it didn't disappoint.
No, technically it wasn't the greatest match ever, it was, however, arguably the best meeting between the two. They've not topped it since and I do include the Inferno match in there. Everyone knew at the start of the match that Undertaker was going to win. He had to. One tombstone later and that was it... who gets up from the Tombstone? Kane, apparantly. He then proceeded to do it once more. And on both occasions he fought back. He sat up straight away and too the fight back to the Undertaker like it hadn't happened? Is this no-selling? Is it fuck. Is this demeaning the Undertaker's finishing move? Not at all, he's got 7 years of destruction behind him at this point. Countless superstars laying in his wake, an unprecedented streak at Wrestlemania which is already cementing his legend and, oh yeah, his character has just come back from the dead... I suppose you can say he has certain abilities us normal folk don't have. Problem is... So does Kane.

So Kane can withstand two tombstones, can he handle three? Will Taker get the chance? Right now, Kane is looking awesome. He's gonna win. I backed the wrong fucking horse. I'm pissed but my eyes are still glued to the screen. I can't wait to see what happens next. Come on 'Taker. Come on Undertaker. For the love of God. I'm a HUGE Fan, Pull something special out of the bag. Do it for me.

He did it. Not for me in particular. But he did it. It made it all the more special that Kane had kicked out... Twice. It got me and I suppose everyone else thinking 'what the fuck does Taker have to do to beat this guy?'

Sure, Kane could have just reversed it. But that doesn't show strength in the same way. That just makes Kane look like he wasn't weak enough to be beaten yet. That Taker was jumping the gun a little. If he was beat with one tombstone then he's no different to every other opponent Taker's beaten. If Kane didn't kick out of the first tombstone then why was Taker so reluctant to fight his brother. That'd hardly be a challenge. Taker came out of that match looking awesome. His fans felt like they'd climbed the mountain with him. It felt like a title victory.

There are others that are memorable to me because of reversals. Rock/ Stone Cold at their first WM main event. Benoit/ Angle both Ultimate Submission and their title match at Royal Rumble 2000. Many many more. They tell the story.

A finisher is the in ring equivilant to a gun shot, point blank to the head. It will beat you... but not always. Sometimes, the bullet gets lodged but doesn't pierce. It's improbable. Unlikely. But not impossible.

Also consider that certain people have different strengths and weaknesses. I'm more likely to tap out to a figure four than a full nelson because my legs are weaker than my arms. My shoulders are also strong so bomb manouvres would be less effective than a drop to my head like a piledriver or a DDT. This strengths are quite obvious by looking at people as well. Look at John Cena, you reckon he's an arms or leg type of guy. Simple is arms, he shows his strength every match. Sure, his legs aren't weak but they're not as good as his arms.

This happens in some of the best matches. It breaks those matches away from your bog standard ritual matches (same move routine now... end) and leaves you wondering where it can go next and when it will end... how it will end. I hope it never changes.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

I hate this shit so much. I mean, the reason the thing the above poster cited was SO impactfull, was becuase it hadnt really happened before. but its fairly common now. These days you can barely GET a main event match without someone kicking out of at least ONE finisher, which is terrible in my opinion. its the fault of the fucking stupid ass attitude era, and ME's that had both guys kicking out of each others finisherd 30 damn times. We have seen a slight curtailing of this as of late, as one pedigree, or one FU have been putting people down, but its still suffering from a small amount of bastardization. Kudos to the bookers for somewhat getting it under control again.